Since this Toyota business is a bit new to me, I ran a web search to see if the dealership version of the story is the same as the people effected are telling. It isn't.
Apparently, the manual recommended 7500 mile changes, or 5000 if under severe conditions. We are told that the gelation problem has been noted in cars with under 3000 miles on the oil.
The pendulum of truth is certainly not tarrying long on the side of Toyota.
I've gotta ask. Where "are we told" that the gelation problem has been noted in cars with under 3,000 miles on the oil. Wher did you find this information.
And have those cars experiencing sluding always had a regular oil change within the recommended limits? Or did the car owners in question all of a sudden get serious about oil changes after they had a problem.
Haven't seen anything to verify this statement so far.
I found it in the websearch. There are lots of pages of info (and probably misinformation as well) about this problem. Toyota flatly states that maintain the oil changes WILL PREVENT the problem, in their website. I have found a good bit of rebuttal for this. 'We are told' is a pretty non accusatory phrase.
Good question. Wish I knew the answer. Usually where there is this level of smoke, there are some sparks, but I dont make any blanket statements until I know more. Some of the posters here, whose opinion I normally respect, have made me doubt the Toyota explanation. But we both know that owners are often lax in maintenance, and inventive in their complaints.
Then sanswer me these:
WHY did they "start showing up a few years back?" Did people suddenly stop changing their oil, or did Toyota make a change that had an unintended effect and rendered that engine susceptible?
WHY don't other Toyota engines show the same problem at the same rate?
WHY don't other carmakers engines show the same statistics? (Some specific engines do, and they have a problem as well!)
Most importantly, why is it so hard to admit Toyota screwed up?
You are, of course. However, a 3000 mile change interval is STUPID with modern oils, and any engine that truly REQUIRES it is a piss-poor design and unworthy of being on the market. My 1966 V8, my '69 V8, my 73 V8, and my 93 V6 engines ALL have passed 160,000 miles (241,000 for the 93,
430,0000 for the 73!) with 7000+ mile change intervals. 1973 American engine technology isn't THAT much better than modern Japanese engine technology! ;) End of discussion.I agree when it comes to suing Toyota or doing something like that. They covered their bases just fine, and so the only real recourse people have is to quit buying Toyotas until they can demonstrate that the problem is well and truly fixed.
No, but lots of them, including GM, allow much longer drain intervals and have oil-monitoring systems.
This may sound like I'm ripping Toyota a new one, but I'm really not. They've made some incredibly reliable engines over the years. My gut feeling is that they tried something to reduce emissions or increase efficiency, and it had an unwanted side-effect. Same thing for the Chrysler 2.7 v6, in my opinion. Chrysler is my brand of choice most of the time, but I won't buy a 2.7 for anything! It happens to all carmakers. What I can't understand or abide is the attitude that " can do NO wrong! It must be the owners!"
Fully agree. I maintain my cars very well and seldom have I had a problem. (Exception, a Ford 428 Cobra that broke a piston at 17,000 miles)
Chrysler engines have traditionally been very strong, as you say. Their Mitsubishi engine choices may not be so great.
Toyota appears to have had some some sort of problem with these engines, but hesitates to admit it if it is so. The service manager at this dealership states that he believes that the problem has been solved (aha...maybe there was a problem), but still recommends conscientious management.
Some of the web accounts I have read indicate that many owners were less than diligent about keeping their documentation about oil changes, and Toyota was probably looking to avoid paying whenever they could. It was relationswise a bad move.
I live about 60 miles from the dealership. I do not intend to drive there every time I need an oil change to get their blessing. If that is the name of the game, I'll do something else.
I find situations like this very unsatisfying. The truth is there somewhere, but it seems hard to get to the very bottom of this story.
Appreciate your comments.
The Lucerne uses the iron-horse series-III 3800 and the Northstar V8 - both have been proven as good engines, although I wouldnt personally buy any car in it's first model year.
To defend Toyota for a minute... I think that's a symptom of society. A corporation simply can't honestly admit a mistake these days without opening itself to a FLOOD of damage claims, and I'm not just saying people asking for a replacement engine (which they deserve), I'm talking about people asking for a brand new car because "it shouldn't have broken! I don't want a lemon!" Buyers seem so out of touch with reality that they no longer understand the fact that manufacturing isn't perfect, and "sometimes you get a bad one." And that replacing the defective part is fair, but providing a brand new car isn't.
Oh, I don't know. One of the best cars I ever bought was a first-year Chrysler LH series (93 Eagle Vision TSi) built about 5 months into the production run. Still have it with 241,000 miles on the clock.
In the case of the Lucerne, if its using a Northstar and a Gen-III
3800, the only "new" things about it are all low-risk engineering items. I have to admit ignorance on many of the new GM cars, but I did notice that the "all new" (according to the clever commercial with herds of metallic antelope) Impala appears to have the exact same underpinnings as a circa-1990 Olds Cutlass and Pontiac Grand Prix when you look under one in person. And thats a GOOD thing, IMO.I feel that my story, although slightly off-topic, might shed some light. I bought a 1995 Toyota T100 pickup in December of 2000. 3.4 liter V6, automatic, 2WD long bed. At the time I bought it, it was showing 219,000 miles on the clock. In June of 2002, at 242,000 miles, it blew a head gasket. I knew that Toyota had experienced head gasket issues with this engine and that there was a recall on them. Per the dealership's service managaer's advice, I drove it to the local Toyota dealership - probably 8-10 miles. I made sure the coolant was full and drove gingerly. So, two days after taking the truck there, the service manager calls and says it was indeed a blown head gasket, the repair would be covered under the recall, and that I had pitting in several cylinder bores due to coolant leaking into the cylinders. The solution was new short block. Here's the kicker - Toyota covered the short block too under the head gasket warranty. I didn't have to scream, threaten, or anything. They admitted the problem was theirs and took responsibility for it. The repair was wrapped up in about 5 days and I now have 316,000 miles on the truck. Am I a fan of Toyota? Because of this experience, absolutely. Would I be a fan of GM or Ford or Chrysler if I'd been treated the same way? Absolutely. Experience, though has shown me that domestic car companies/dealerships have a "blame the owner first" policy. Just my $.02.
Your story echos the common reaction to the V6 recall on Toyota trucks / 4Runners by their owners. I had a hard time believing the vehicles that we would provide warranty coverage for, though. In some cases, the truck was a totally neglected shitbox, but it got repaired just the same. I much prefered doing recalls on the well maintained trucks and the ones that weren't jury-rigged by incompetent butchers. Something about performing "free" work for someone that doesn't IMO deserve it gets under my craw :)
Toyota MDT in MO
We all have stories. I'll keep mine short: Chevy Camaro Z28, engine seazed at 42k miles - no Recall or Service Bulletin; Chevy put a new LONG BLOCK in, no qualms, no charge.
Jesus Christ man, calm down. You need to relax. I think the reason all these sludged engines showed up recently is because of a design issue that caused excessive heat transfer into the lubrication system. This is what I was told by a few product engineers at the Central Atlantic Toyota hq in Baltimore. The 'issue', however, was not enough by itself to cause sludging along with regular maintenance. Even cars that strictly followed Toyotas 7500 mile intervals never showed a problem. As is normal, a lot of people pushed the recommendation of 7500 miles, servicing their engines at 10k mile intervals or often more, and the system didn't have enough of a 'buffer' to make up for this excess mileage. Delaying a 3k oil change interval is no big deal, as you are erring on the side of caution to begin with. The fact still remains that I have seen hundreds and hundreds of these sludged engines, and none has ever had a service history that stood up to anything. Oil gelling happens due to lack of attention, and it just so happened that Toyota's 1MZ FE had a lower threshold of poor maintenance. And don't take all this stuff so personally, man. It's not like I'm a Toyota rep out here pushing secrets under the rug. I've been with a Toyota dealer for 5 years, and I'm just telling you what I've seen. All you wierdos out there that think people like me, comboverfish, and MDT from MO are conspirators need to cool it.
Cool, I'm a co-conspirator!
Q, noone ever listens to you if their mind is made up about the Toyota sludge issue. I have done *only* a dozen or so sludge jobs, but our shop spreads them out evenly. It sounds like you are the official Sludge Dude at your shop. I can relate. When I started in '96 I became the unofficial V05 / X01 campaign guy, ending up with about 200 of those jobs to present. What the other guys didn't realize was that they were moneymakers.
What I can't get is why the determined-minded detractors don't take any credo from mechanics who see these engines and their repair histories every day. Especially those that don't know anything about cars! -- not a shot at guys on this NG, but in reference to other arenas of discussion. We aren't corporate shills; it's just about letting people know what we see and think about this issue IMO. AKAIC, if people change their oil every 3k - 7k / 3 - 6 months they will be cruising sludge-free with the 5SFE or 1MZFE -- even in the worst driving conditions. Like you said, it's always the cars with no maintenance history that get the free engine work.
And yes, I think the 5SFE is a buzzy, underpowered engine; but the
1MZFE is a work of art. If only the cylinders could be bored after someone trashes one I would have a couple spares in my garage...Toyota MDT in MO
On 25 Oct 2005 21:33:14 -0700, "Comboverfish" wrote: SNIP
Off Subject, sorry about that
Being you sound knowledgeable as to Toyota engines I was hoping you could answer a question I have regarding the Lexus 98 2JZ straight 6 DOHC Vortech engine. Being that I have yet to receive what I felt to be a straight answer from anyone involved with Lexus or Toyota. The car, a Lexus GS 300, was purchased new in early 1998 and driven locally for over 3000 miles, running fine. After a trip to Texas our son heard what sounded to him like a cold start rod knock, upon starting the car after setting a day or so. I have complained to Lexus up to the US corporate level for over a year and have received assurances that it is a normal noise for that engine, but with no explanation as to the cause of the noise. The noise is infrequent, about 60% of the cold starts and sounds like a worn rod bering. The car now has over
60,000 miles on it, 95% highway, and still makes the noise so I'am convinced that it is not a rod bearing. Do you have any information as to the cause of the noise, it's driving me nuts? The car a 98 Lexus GS 300 runs and preforms great, no problems other than the noise and dealer recalls. Any help would be appreciated. ***************** Thank You snipped-for-privacy@msbx.netJack Kevorkian for White House physician.
To reply to this email please remove the AT after the kgs in the reply to address as shown above.
That was exactly the point I was making. Its a design flaw that should be fixed by a fundamental design change, not band-aids.
Whether or not it is aggravated by poor maintenance or not is a completely different question- carmakers have made millions of engines that aren't delicate fainting flowers, have done so since the 1930s, and there's damn sure no excuse for selling two such designs in an ordinary everyday vehicle (pickups and Camrys) in today's world. There's really not any need for engines in "exotics" to be delicate fainting flowers anymore, either. Even if problems can be *usually* be avoided by meticulous mainetnance, there is obviously less margin of safety and problems are more *likely* even with meticulous maintenance.
FWIW- I'm no easier on Chrysler about the almost identical problem with the 2.7L v6, despite the fact that there are folks in this NG who've gotten great service out of them by handling them with kid gloves and changing the oil every 3000 miles. There's no excuse for a company with the record of building wonderful and indestructible engines (318, 383,
440, slant-6, 3.5 v6, 3.3 v6, 2.2 I4, 4.7L v8, 5.7L Hemi v8) to let loose a clunker like the 2.7.Nor do I easily forgive GM the fiascos with the Chevy V6 intake manifold coolant leaks, Ford its fires, Honda its Odyssey transmission mess, etc. Why should anyone give Toyota a freebie for a mistake as bad as any of the others?
coolant leaks, Ford its fires, Honda its Odyssey transmission mess, etc. Why should anyone give Toyota a freebie for a mistake as bad as any of the others?
answer a question I
have yet to receive
for over 3000
like a cold start rod
Lexus up to the US
normal noise for that
infrequent, about 60%
60,000 miles on it, 95%bearing. Do you have any
Lexus GS 300 runs and
If the noise seems worse on cold starts then it sounds like piston slap, which is caused by worn piston skirts. A rod bearing would make aprox the same intensity of noise regardless of temperature.
One good thing about piston slap is that as long as it is fairly mild, you won't suffer any long term consequences. I don't know if it is common in the 2JZFE (don't see many of these), but it shouldn't be considered "normal". Supra (93-98 non-turbo) and GS300 owner's forums would be where I would search for more owner opinions and talk about this particular engine.
Toyota MDT in MO
I accept all this as a given... but that doesn't mean that such a marginal design is up to industry standard, hence I would advise the original poster to AVOID the marginal designs altogether. That's all I'm saying. If I were buying a GM, I'd make sure I had a 3800 v6, Ecotec 4, Northstar, or Gen-III v8 and not a 2.8/3.1/3.4 family v6. If I were buying a Chrysler, I'd make sure it had any engine other than a Mitsushitti-built engine or the Chrysler 2.7 v6. If buying a Toyota, I'd avoid the engines that have experienced high replacement rates too.
Before you go around making more blanket statements about the "marginal" or "poor" designs of certain Toyota motors, I would like to hear the specifics about the poor design features that caused the sludging problem. Please share them.
Also, if the sludging problem is truly related to shortcomings in the design and not poor maintenance, then how does one account the the tens of thousands of cars using those engines that are still on the road and performing just fine.
MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.